An acoustic study of multiple lateral consonants in three Central Australian languages

Abstract

This study presents dental, alveolar, retroflex, and palatal lateral /̪ll ɭ ʎ/ data from three Central Australian languages: Arrernte, Pitjantjatjara, and Warlpiri. Formant results show that the laminal laterals (dental /̪l/ and palatal /ʎ/) have a relatively low F1, presumably due to a high jaw position for these sounds, as well as higher F4. In addition, the palatal /ʎ/ has very high F2. There is relatively little difference in F3 between the four lateral places of articulation. However, the retroflex /ɭ/ appears to have slightly lower F3 and F4 in comparison to the other lateral sounds. Importantly, spectral moment analyses suggest that centre of gravity and standard deviation (first and second spectral moments) are sufficient to characterize the four places of articulation. The retroflex has a concentration of energy at slightly lower frequencies than the alveolar, while the palatal has a concentration of energy at higher frequencies. The dental is characterized by a more even spread of energy. These various results are discussed in light of different acoustic models of lateral production, and the possibility of spectral cues to place of articulation across manners of articulation is considered.

Acoustic Realization and Inventory Size: Kannada and Malayalam Alveolar/Retroflex Laterals and /ɻ/

“…It can be seen that the CoG is lower for the retroflex /ɭ/ than it is for the alveolar /l/ in both languages. This is consistent with the results found in Tabain et al (2016c), where the retroflex had a lower CoG than the alveolar. Note that in that study, the CoG also seemed to be indicative of the apical versus laminal contrast, with the dental and palatal laminals having higher CoG than the alveolar and retroflex apicals.…”

“…(c.f. Tabain et al, 2016c, apical > laminal for F1 in Central Australian languages; Punnoose et al, 2013, andMcDonough andJohnson, 1997, /ɭ/ > /l/ for F1 in Malayalam and Tamil, respectively; but note that no difference between /ɭ/ and /l/ was reported for F1 by . For the /ɭ/ vs. /ɻ/ contrast in Malayalam, there is no difference in F1.…”

“…It is worth noting that in the study of Australian languages by Tabain et al (2016c), SD distinguished the laminodental from the other laterals (alveolar, retroflex, and laminopalatal), with a higher SD for the dental. It is therefore conceivable that the alveolar lateral may be denti-alveolar.…”

“…In order to ensure maximum comparability with the study of lateral consonants in Central Australian languages by Tabain et al (2016c), data for the present study were sampled at the temporal midpoint of the consonant. However, as part of our original data exploration, we examined the laterals and the rhotic at the temporal onset and at the temporal offset of the consonant, and spectra sampled at these 3 time points will be presented and briefly discussed further below.…”

Young infants’ discrimination of subtle phonetic contrasts

“…This is problematic for several reasons. First, recent acoustic investigations of Australian languages 1 point to the possibility that the F2-F3 space might not be ideal to compare the distinctiveness of subtle place differences for either nasals (Tabain, Butcher, Breen & Beare, 2016a) or laterals (Tabain, Butcher, Breen & Beare, 2016b). Instead, Tabain and colleagues report greater success with measures that index the shape of the acoustic spectrum.…”